If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The next release is already pretty set, and has been for a while. Any changes to the UI would have to wait unitil the next one.

Ok, thanks. Any idea where the "small button icon" issue is on the priority list? Also, did you see my suggestion a couple of posts ago regarding unpinch/pinch gesture for resizing and Noodler's double tap suggestion for bringing up the equipment selector? Comments appreciated from all.

Comment

Just wanted to mention, FWIW, I was messing around with a few solutiona to manage my library of songbook material, and a great companion product for the ipb-10 is the OnSong app for the ipad.

Its really a great way to manage whatever library of song material you have. Excellent integration and syncing between pad, dropbox, iTunes, internet, and your computer.

Tons of awesome and clever features. Real pleasure to use once past the learning curve and tons of vendor/user support. I had used Tab Toolkit a lot to date, but this one seems more logical/useable/freindly/powerful and I really like the integration.

Comment

The other point to raise is... I know it's impractical for full live use, but considering the iPad merely controls the iPB unit, it seems that a scaled-down Nexus app for the iPhone would be doable. The iPhone 4S certainly has enough power to be a remote for the iPB. Would DigiTech ever consider building an app for basic functionality for the iPhone? It would be handy for those who always have their iPhone with them, but might forget their iPad. Not to mention a sales avenue for the iPB for guitarist who want the sounds, basic control, and the awesome technology and innovation of the unit, but don't want to buy the iPB because they have to have an iPad. This way they could buy an iPB and take advantage of it's awesomeness, and pickup an iPad down the road.

I'll see you the iPhone app request, and raise you a request for a full-on public API for the iPb-10. Seriously, let's see what DTR has to say on this issue. Why not publish an API of commands which can address the hardware of the box itself? Then, DT could continue to diddle with Nexus at its own pace (or not), while those of us in the IT industry could come up with some really cool apps, using our own devices and not be limited by Apple, or Digitech in terms of the feature set we would like to implement. Think of the possibilities: Android, generic tablets, bluetooth, midi/program-controlled patch switching. Of course, there would need to be some sort of hardware adapter cable to get alternate devices hooked into the unit, but that's probably not too hard a project. Think of it: DT releases the API one time, and frees itself forever from having to be in the software development business (which clearly is not its forte). Then the free-lancers take over and make some really innovative stuff. Imagine how many more iPb units would be sold if there were multiple and unlimited ways to address the box. Imagine being able to integrate the iPb into virtually any other device or app you can think of! What say you DigiTechRep? I say: Down with tyranny! Free the iPB!

Comment

Imagine my cold sweat when i'm on my way to church for rehearsal last night when I realized I left the iPad at work. DOH!!!

My patches are kind of sporadic - I usually create a patch tailored for each song, and I had not had time to practice or create a sound. I had the sounds I used the last time I played, thankfully. But what is what switch? No clue. At the very least, I knew that the iPB works without the iPad thankfully, but I would have to hit a few switches before I found a sound good enough for practice.

The point of my story is, that I love that I can use the iPB10 without the iPad in a pinch. The other point of my story is, don't leave you iPad at work if you haven't prepared your sounds ahead of time and know what's there. It feels like you're playing blind.

Given that the iPB-10 is an all-metal chassis I would assume that many of the magnetic pedalboard labels would work on it. It's certainly possible to label some of the stomps and may even be preferable when using it for serious gigging. The if your iPad is forgotten or goes on the blink you won't be entirely lost. Of course with 20 banks you're not going to be able to label everything.

Comment

Back to the iPB-10 tones. After tons of experimentation with lots of different power amps, cabinets, and speakers I've arrived at an ear-to-ear smile place in my quest. Along the way there were a lot of duds, so take that into account if you ever read any negative comments on the tones coming out of this unit. In the end my recommendation is to go with a flat response high fidelity power amp (I'm using a class AB solid-state with plenty of power) and a full range speaker cabinet setup. Normal guitar amps and typical guitar speaker cabinets put a "veil" over the sound no matter how much I tried to dial it out. The tones just didn't have that "in the room" presence that I want. I'm not saying that you need to go FRFR (although that probably might work out well), but I think the iPB-10 shines with a rig that has decent response up into the 10kHz range.

Comment

@Noodler: I'm most happy with the range of sounds I get going straight into the clean channel of my Super Champ XD with either no cab emulation, or one that doesn't fight too much with the natural tones of my existing cab - which is not surprisingly, most often one of the tweed cab models. I've tried going straight into both a PA and studio monitors and I just don't get that bell-like sound quality that I get from a real final tube stage. On the other hand, I think the iPB is versatile enough that you can probably dial in just about any sound desired using any real amp/cab combination you might have. I just have not yet found that glassy end polish of real power tubes within the iPB itself when going straight into a FRFR.

Personally, I think cab emulations are a bit overrated in general, since from what I can tell they're basically just parametric EQ filters labeled as cabinets. Others may correct me, but I don't sense any dynamic variations with these based on volume or attack as in the amp sims.

Comment

The other reason to use a real final tube stage and cab (for me) is that a real cabinet has inner dynamics and harmonics which are rich and complex and much more than simple EQ. It's the same reason that a real grand piano will probably never be fully modelable (is that a word?) and will always and forever sound better than sampled pianos: There are an infinite number of possible dynamic combinations when you have not just note combinations, but delicate harmonics which result from phrasing and the interplay of particular notes on other notes, on the wood, etc. It produces a huge spectrum of sound possibilities which it would be inconceivable to try and sample without dedicating a Cray computer and thousands of man-hours to the task. I think it's the same - to a lesser degree - with cabinet simulations - a real cabinet is not just an EQ filter, but has all sorts of dynamic interplay with the amp/room/humidity/temperature, etc.

Comment

Personally, I think cab emulations are a bit overrated in general, since from what I can tell they're basically just parametric EQ filters labeled as cabinets. Others may correct me, but I don't sense any dynamic variations with these based on volume or attack as in the amp sims.

It depends on the emulation. The first cabinet emulation I know of was the analog one I designed for the Quadrafuzz in the mid-80s. I designed a really nice two-pole filter, minimum ripple, minimum phase shift, smooth rolloff...the perfect filter. It sounded terrible

So then I went back and re-designed it for maximum passband ripple, tons of phase shift, and generally, to be as "wrong" as possible. I used unmatched resistors, ceramic capacitors that varied with temperature, etc. To top it all off, I used a cheap dual pot to control frequency where the elements were not matched very well. It sounded great, and also taught me a valuable lesson!

I don't know specifically what technology DigiTech uses, but a lot of cabinet emulations are convolution-based. When creating amp sim-based setups inside a computer, I pile on plug-ins that add variables. For example, putting a de-esser in front of distortion, where the high frequencies vary dynamically with how you play, can make a huge difference in the sound.

I don't think any manufacturer has successfully duplicated the feel to the guitar player of playing into a cabinet live, but it's not hard any more to record a track with an amp, record a track with a sim like the iPB-10, and on playback, even listeners with great ears can't tell the difference. I think a lot of that is because amps are emulated by being miked and analyzed, and amps are recorded by being miked. The mic itself is "the great leveler." When your ears can hear the cabinet responding to your playing directly without the "middleman" of a mic, it's a different experience.

This was demonstrated fairly dramatically to me while doing the pro review that involves Line 6's DT-25 amp. It has a DI out that emulates the DT-25 cabinet. When I first set it up, the emulation didn't sound at all like the cabinet. Changing the mic position just a few inches in any direction made a huge difference, and I was able to match the emulated sound. But if you think about playing guitar, your head is not locked into a position that doesn't vary by even a millimeter. As a result, you're constantly hearing changes caused by, as you say, not just the amp, humidity, but also the room - which is a huge factor.

Comment

It's the same reason that a real grand piano will probably never be fully modelable (is that a word?) and will always and forever sound better than sampled pianos: There are an infinite number of possible dynamic combinations when you have not just note combinations, but delicate harmonics which result from phrasing and the interplay of particular notes on other notes, on the wood, etc. It produces a huge spectrum of sound possibilities which it would be inconceivable to try and sample without dedicating a Cray computer and thousands of man-hours to the task.

Not to get too far off-topic here, but it's your fault for bringing up something really interesting

I've logged a fair amount of time with Roland's SuperNATURAL synthesis technology, and to me it's like the audio equivalent of CGI graphics. The models don't have the imperfections of the real world, but they don't really have the imperfections of sampling, either. For example, the bass has no dead spots on the neck, no fret buzz, the strings are all the same age, etc. While it's not particularly realistic on one level, it's hyper-realistic in the sense that it's what a bass would be if a bass could be perfect. In a way, it has its own character that goes beyond sampling to achieve a different kind of experience. So to me that doesn't replace conventional instruments which have their own inherent beauty, but instead, creates a new type of instrument with its own inherent beauty.

As an analogy, if you photograph a beautiful woman and use Photoshop and airbrushing to create the Perfect Beautiful Woman, that's its own art form. But if you started off with a beautiful woman, she's still beautiful without Photoshop - and sometimes its the imperfections that create the uniqueness. Sophia Loren always felt her nose was "too big," and if she was being photographed nowadays, they'd probably make her nose smaller - and destroy the unique symmetry it added to her eyes, lips, and cheekbones.

Comment

Cool, didn't know you were the designer of the Quadrafuzz! (Hope you licensed the hell out of that to Steinberg!) But wasn't that essentially an amp sim as opposed to a cab sim? Seems like, at least today, cab sims are just a final EQ stage after all the cool stuff is done in the amp sims and effects. I'm not an electronics whiz, but do have a very good ear, so just going by what I hear in the models.

Comment

While it's not particularly realistic on one level, it's hyper-realistic in the sense that it's what a bass would be if a bass could be perfect. In a way, it has its own character that goes beyond sampling to achieve a different kind of experience. So to me that doesn't replace conventional instruments which have their own inherent beauty, but instead, creates a new type of instrument with its own inherent beauty.

Well said, and I know exactly what you mean. I've created some synth bass sounds based on real samples combined with LFOs which are other-worldly and really "perfect" (at least within the normal range). I'm not at all opposed to synthetics, but I guess the point is that an accoustic - and unmiked - instrument is basically about as perfect and unique as you can get - in the Sophia Lorren sense (loved that nose).

One final thought on natural vs electronicly "perfect" sound generation is that from my experience, the mind and ear get tired (and even bored) more quickly when listening to artificial sounds. Example: auto-tune. My wife was just listening to a vocal which was only slightly auto-tuned, but they went further into the polish and added electronic vibrato and sustain, etc. with pseudo-human qualities. At first, it sounded really interesting and artistic. But I got tired of it much sooner than I would have given a real human voice with nuance and imperfections. In the final analysis, perhaps perfection is over-rated. Music, ultimately is about soul - and I have yet to meet one that is perfect. Androids are likely doomed to lose their battle for the final frontier in art!

Comment

I'll see you the iPhone app request, and raise you a request for a full-on public API for the iPb-10. Seriously, let's see what DTR has to say on this issue. Why not publish an API of commands which can address the hardware of the box itself?

100% agree! DigiTechRep, please propose this to your management.

Publishing the API to allow the community developing good iPB-Apps is a great idea!

Comment

If DigiTech would actually publish the API and permit 3rd-party development for their hardware platform that would tell me that they actually "get it" - that they truly understand the power of the iPad (or even Android) platform. They would just have to include some kind of disclaimer regarding how they'll provide support. This really goes back to what I said in an earlier post about leveraging the hardware interface (I/O and switches) to allow other amp sims, etc. to utilize the system directly.

Comment

We have discussed offering some sort of SDK for the iPB-10, and it may one day happen. Since we are working with very limited resources, we need to focus on getting the iPB's core functionality and spec'd features nailed down first before we worry about any external stuff. Additionally we have never offered an SDK for any of our products ever, so doing so for the iPB-10 will be a huge cultural change and a huge challenge. We are a capital "H" hardware company learning how to be a software company, we will be taking baby-steps into these areas.